FROM the EDITORS:

IMPORTANT INFORMATION:Opinions expressed on the Insight Scoop weblog are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the positions of Ignatius Press. Links on this weblog to articles do not necessarily imply agreement by the author or by Ignatius Press with the contents of the articles. Links are provided to foster discussion of important issues. Readers should make their own evaluations of the contents of such articles.

NEW & UPCOMING, available from IGNATIUS PRESS

Monday, August 20, 2007

What Kidman should know about Pullman

In all of the excitement and furor over the final Harry Potter book, relatively little attention (or so it seems to me) has been paid to the upcoming release of the movie, The Golden Compass, based on the book of the same name (titled Northern Lights in England) by Philip Pullman. That book is the first in the trilogy, His Dark Materials, a children's book series that is award-winning, best-selling, and openly antagonistic to "organized religion"—namely, the Catholic Church. Some of the basic facts about Pullman's beliefs are presented in this Wikipedia entry:

The His Dark Materials books have been at the heart of controversy, especially with certain Christian groups. Some, including Peter Hitchens, claim that he actively pursues an anti-Christian agenda.[4] Proponents of this view cite the critical articles he has written regarding C. S. Lewis' series The Chronicles of Narnia (which Pullman denounces as religious propaganda), and the usually negative portrayal of the "Church" in His Dark Materials.

The two series have some resemblance. Both feature children facing
adult moral choices, talking animals, religious allegories, parallel
worlds, and concern the ultimate fate of those worlds. The first
published Narnia book, The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe, begins with a young girl hiding in a wardrobe, as does the first His Dark Materials book, Northern Lights (published as The Golden Compass in North America).

Some, including Hitchens again, have seen the His Dark Materials series as a direct rebuttal of C. S. Lewis's series.[5] Pullman has also criticised the way Lewis excludes the character Susan from the final 'heaven' scenes in The Last Battle, saying she is rejected for her growing worldliness.[6]
Lewis devotees argue that Pullman has read too deeply into this; Lewis
made no statement about Susan's ultimate destiny, and never excluded
the possibility of her rejoining her friends in heaven later, as they
are dead and she is still alive.

However, Pullman has found support from other Christians, most notably Rowan Williams, the Archbishop of Canterbury. These groups and individuals point out that Pullman's attacks are focused on the constraints of dogmatism and the use of religion to oppress, not on Christianity itself. Dr. Williams has gone so far as to propose that His Dark Materials be taught as part of religious education
in schools. Moreover, even authors of works dedicated to critical
appraisals of religious themes in his writing have described Pullman as
a friendly and generous debating partner[7].

Kidman said some of the religious elements were removed from the
movie script. "It has been watered down a little," she told
Entertainment Weekly.

"I was raised Catholic, the Catholic Church is part of my
essence," Kidman said.

"I wouldn't be able to do this film if I thought it were at all
anti-Catholic."

In Pullman's book, he describes an organisation that snatches
children to surgically remove their souls, in a reference widely
considered to be a controversial description of the Catholic
Church.

In the film script, the organisation is referred to only as a
fictional place known as "the Magisterium".

The Golden Compass, which will be the first film in a
fantasy trilogy starring Kidman, is not due for release in the US
until December 7, but it is already prompting concern among parent
groups.

Thomas Peters has an excellent post about Kidman's remarks and related matters on the American Papist blog. And Peters points to another good post, by Christopher Blosser, with many more helpful materials that provide necessary context and information. Meanwhile, Pullman's site has this very direct statement about religion:

Some of the articles and talks I've written are to do with the subject of religion, which I think is a very interesting one. The religious impulse – which includes the sense of awe and mystery we feel when we look at the universe, the urge to find a meaning and a purpose in our lives, our sense of moral kinship with other human beings – is part of being human, and I value it. I'd be a damn fool not to.

But organised religion is quite another thing. The trouble is that all too often in human history, churches and priesthoods have set themselves up to rule people's lives in the name of some invisible god (and they're all invisible, because they don't exist) – and done terrible damage. In the name of their god, they have burned, hanged, tortured, maimed, robbed, violated, and enslaved millions of their fellow-creatures, and done so with the happy conviction that they were doing the will of God, and they would go to Heaven for it.

That is the religion I hate, and I'm happy to be known as its enemy.

From time to time I have a new thought on the subject. When I come up with something worth writing down, I'll put it here.

Finally, Sandra Miesel and I are co-authoring a piece for Catholic World Report about Pullman, his trilogy, and the upcoming movie (I think it will appear in the December 2007 issue of CWR). As I do research, I'll likely be posting more about the topic in the weeks to come.

"In the name of their god, they have burned, hanged, tortured, maimed, robbed, violated, and enslaved millions of their fellow-creatures"
To the extent that this is true, it is neither the fault of God (obviously) nor the Catholic FAITH. It is the fault of sinful man.
If sin in the name of God has been popular, it hasn't been more popular than sin in man's own name. Burning, hanging, torturing, maiming, robbing, and violating millions of fellow creatures were favorite pastimes long before Jesus was sent to redeem man. Else our Heavenly Father would not have sent Jesus.
What makes man blind to his own cruelty to the extent that he thinks he would be better off without God? It seems as if humanity is coming as close as it can to killing God all over again, and, like the last time, because we need a scapegoat to justify ourselves.
We sure don't learn from our worst mistakes, do we? The rising popular trend is to band together as man against God. How dumb can you get?
As for Pullman's series, the first of the lot is the most dangerous because much is veiled and it is an intriguing story, well told, except for the daemon aftertaste which causes the reader to ask , "Daemon. He can't mean 'demon' can he? Nah. Or does he?" What keeps the asker from looking in the dictionary? Good question.
It isn't until the second book that a Catholic can be sure he's ingesting something foul. For the kids, if this series gets the support of libraries, school systems and parents, as Potter did, the first film may be as risky as the book.

I majored in European History in college and from time to time the question arose: what practical purpose is there to studying history? Having reverted to Catholicism, I now know the answer: to wage the battles of the present. The Church is constantly attacked with grossly inflated accusations of historical wrongdoing, which is inflated further by ignoring the wrongdoings of others -- the Spanish Inquisition is constantly brought up and harped upon while La Vendee, which was far, far worse, is wholly ignored and forgotten. Never heard of La Vendee? Look it up, and then ask yourself why it is such an obscure event in history.

It is routinely claimed or intimated that the Church "burned, hanged, tortured, maimed, robbed, violated, and enslaved" countless people but specifics of who, when, where and how are always left unsaid. But it is believed because this is what people want to believe --if they feel they can discredit the Church based on past wrongdoing they then have stronger grounds for disregarding what what the Church preaches.

Church apologetics needs to be expanded to the historical. We all know that members of the Church have acted poorly at times and have abused power -- the world will never let us forget this. But viewed in context, the Church has a glorious history: her saints, her great legacy of charity, the learning she has promoted, the art she has promoted, etc. I so wish this were more actively pointed out through the media, etc.

A slim chance (since we live some 2,000 miles apart), although it has happened once or twice in the past. Funny story: the first time that Sandra and I ever met in person was at EWTN after our book, The Da Vinci Hoax, was published. Ah, the wonders of technology...

"But organised religion is quite another thing. The trouble is that all too often in human history, churches and priesthoods have set themselves up to rule people's lives in the name of some invisible god (and they're all invisible, because they don't exist) – and done terrible damage. In the name of their god, they have burned, hanged, tortured, maimed, robbed, violated, and enslaved millions of their fellow-creatures, and done so with the happy conviction that they were doing the will of God, and they would go to Heaven for it."

Given his premise and the fact that he mentions the priesthood suggests to me that he is talking about the Catholic Church (of course) and has accepted the Dan Brown magnitudinal error. However, if we are to compare notes on the magnitudes of millions dead and enslaved the only religious dogmatists that accomplished that kind of slaughter were atheists by official policy or practicing anti-Catholics and anti-Semites like the Nazis. The only comparison in recent times that we can make is the millions of babies slaughtered here in N. America by the death culture, which expressly ignores and maligns the Catholic Church and its dogma of life.

So regardless of whether there is a God or not, Pullman, (unless he's thinking about the Muslim conquests, although I've never heard of Muslim priests) is just engaging in tired boiler-plate, un-creative, historical dogmatic fantasy. Quite unimaginative and disappointing, but not surprising, because this line of thought has the cache of popular wisdom.

It is another thing to say, as many Catholics will also agree, that Church leadership has often left a lot to be desired in its 2000 year history. I like the way Romping Ronnie Hawkins (from the rock-a-billy era) put it when asked about God.
(paraphrasing) "I've got no problem with God, it's his ground crew I've got problems with."
Fair enough.
I notice Pullman speaks of "organised" religion, as opposed to what, "disorganised" religion? I think a case could be made that when the Church was at its worst in history it was also at its most disorganised, at least from the perspective of the dogmatic teachings of its founder.

LJ,
"The only comparison in recent times that we can make is the millions of babies slaughtered here in N. America by the death culture, which expressly ignores and maligns the Catholic Church and its dogma of life."
There is our BLINDEST spot, when it should be most obvious. All the talk of peace and social justice is hogwash if we can ignore and even SUPPORT the killing of the unborn. Yet every evidence of our brutality toward the most vulnerable is covered up or called "propaganda". It's maddening.

Pullman is on public record as saying that social workers need to start treating religious indoctrination by parents of their children as 'child abuse'.

I was present during the famous debate between Pullman and Williams at the Royal National Theatre, part of the preview activities to the play of the books His Dark Materials. I felt very uncomfortable at the seeming liberal stance taken by Cantur. Of course, there were no Catholic Theologians present at the debate (at least, not on the stage).

I have read the Trilogy, seen the play(s) and I have no doubt that they are very anti-catholic. Indeed, I think so crude is the anti-catholic line in these books that Ian Paisley comes out as an ally of us Papists by contrast.

I would venture Pullman's diatribe against organized religion and priesthood stems from the likes of Hegel and Nietzsche and those ideologies of the Enlightenment that influenced their thought. The basic gist of this malice towards towards organized religion believes that priesthood (whether Brahman, Levite or Christian) is that part of religions that led to ritual and hierarchical structure and thus corrupted faiths by subordinating others and creating a "herd" mentality.
I am not sure of the exact origin of this type of thought (Pre-French Revolution?), but I believe that these type of a priori generalizations have influenced not only those I mentioned above but the likes of Pullman as well. That sad nature of these lies is that they reinvent themselves every few years!

"The basic gist of this malice towards towards organized religion believes that priesthood (whether Brahman, Levite or Christian) is that part of religions that led to ritual and hierarchical structure and thus corrupted faiths by subordinating others and creating a "herd" mentality."

Last night, the guest on "The Journey Home" program at EWTN mentioned something about the tendency of critics of Catholicism to confuse "authoritative" with "authoritarian".

But not in favor of "organized government." In the name of "nations" (a concept that cannot be defined, because there is no such thing as a nation) members of organized governments have tortured, imprisoned, hanged, mutilated, robbed, raped, massacred, and even destroyed with atomic weapons, all the while confident that they would be praised for their "patriotism," even after death.

I say all organized government is evil. The main enemy of the human race is organized government. There can be no "good" organized government, no matter who forms it. I am always and everywhere the enemy of organized government, and proud to be so.